Gotcha, that makes sense. Thanks! Daryl ________________________________________ From: annegen...@justwriteclick.com [annegen...@justwriteclick.com] on behalf of Anne Gentle [a...@openstack.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:28 PM To: Daryl Walleck Cc: openstack-qa-team@lists.launchpad.net Subject: Re: [Openstack-qa-team] Question about licensing header
Hi Daryl - As I understand it (and I am not a lawyer), the Apache2 license affords copyright assignment to the committer. It is correct to have a header with a copyright from the company for which you worked at the time of contribution. See http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html#apply. For the Apache Software Foundation projects, Apache asks that they do not add copyright statements to their header files. OpenStack projects do not have such a policy statement that I know of. Hope this helps! Anne On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Daryl Walleck <daryl.wall...@rackspace.com> wrote: > While I was doing some assorted maintenance on the Nova tests tonight, I > noticed some inconsistencies in the license header of time files. While most > attribute the work to OpenStack, LLC, I also see some where IBM is mentioned > instead. I'm guessing this might be a copy/paste error, or are individual > organizations supposed to be attributing themselves for their submissions? > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-qa-team > Post to : openstack-qa-team@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-qa-team > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-qa-team Post to : openstack-qa-team@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-qa-team More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
